DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20161006

If unnecessary computed tomography scans are performing for abdominal emergent pathologies in our radiology unit; retrospective study with comparing performed abdominal computed tomography scans with previous safer tests like ultrasound

Betül Tiryaki Baştuğ

Abstract


Background: Abdominal computed tomography (CT) is an imaging method that uses X-rays and may be done to look for cause of abdominal pain or swelling and fever, hernia, masses, ınfections, injury. Besides advantages, CT use ionizing radiation, which has the potential to cause cancer. So CT may still be done if the benefits greatly outweigh the risks and it is important to minimize unnecessary CT scans. While a CT scan may provide information, it is sometimes unlikely to change the treatment. This is exactly the type of scan that may be doing a patient more harm than good. So we wonder how we are performing nontraumatic emergent abdominal CT scans in our own radiology unit, if applications are more effective and least harmful.

Methods: In random 232 patients were selected from 1188 nontraumatic emergent abdominal CT scans in the last one year. Findings and previous ultrasonographies were compared and if CT scans brought additional information were examined.

Results: In 5 patients ileus, in 2 patients perforation, in 2 patients appendicitis and in 3 patients ureteral calculi were detected on CT that have not been detected on sonography. In 52 patients pathologies were detected on both ultrasound (US) and CT. 168 patients had not had any pathology. All these findings have been thought that only in 12 patients CT examinations were effective (3 for diagnosing and 9 for verifying secondary findings).

Conclusions: Doctors should consider whether some scans are doing more harm than good because CT scans may cause a large number of new cancers every year.

 


Keywords


Abdominal CT, Abdominal US, Emergent pathologies, Cancer

Full Text:

PDF

References


Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277-84.

Frush DP. Review of radiation issues for computed tomography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2004;25(1):17-24.

Valentin J. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Managing patient dose in multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). ICRP publication 102. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(1):1-79, iii.

Mettler FA, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology. 2008;248(1):254-63.

Brenner DJ, Shuryak I, Einstein AJ. Impact of reduced patient life expectancy on potential cancer risks from radiologic imaging. Radiology. 2011;261(1):193-8.

Little JB. Ionizing Radiation-Chapter 14. In Kufe DW, Pollock RE, Weichselbaum RR, Bast RC Jr, Gansler TS, Holland JF, Frei E III. Cancer medicine (6th ed.). Hamilton, Ont: B.C. Decker. ISBN 1-55009-113-1.

González AB, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch. Intern. Med. 2009;169(22):2071-7.

Nelson R. (December 17, 2009). Thousands of new cancers predicted due to increased use of CT. Medscape. Retrieved January 2, 2010.